"What is objectionable, what is dangerous about extremists is not
that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what
they say about their cause, but what they say about their opponents."

In analyzing the rhetoric and propaganda of several hundred militant
"fringe" political and social groups across the political spectrum,
I have identified a number of specific traits or behaviors that tend to
represent the extremist "style"...

1. CHARACTER ASSASSINATION.

Extremists often attack the character of an opponent rather than deal
with the facts or issues raised. They will question motives, qualifications,
past associations, alleged values, personality, looks, mental health, and
so on as a diversion from the issues under consideration. Some of these
matters are not entirely irrelevant , but they should not serve to avoid
the real issues.

Extremists object strenuously when this is done to them, of course!

2. NAME-CALLING AND LABELING.

Extremists are quick to resort to epithets (racist, subversive, pervert,
hate monger, nut, crackpot, degenerate, un-American, anti-semite, red, commie,
nazi, kook, fink, liar, bigot, and so on) to label and condemn opponents
in order to divert attention from their arguments and to discourage others
from hearing them out. These epithets don't have to be proved to be effective;
the mere fact that they have been said is often enough.

3. IRRESPONSIBLE SWEEPING
GENERALIZATIONS.

Extremists tend to make sweeping claims or judgments on little or no
evidence, and they have a tendency to confuse similarity with sameness.
That is, they assume that because two (or more) things, events, or persons
are alike in some respects, they must be alike in most respects. The sloppy
use of analogy is a treacherous form of logic and has a high potential for
false conclusions.

4. INADEQUATE PROOF FOR
ASSERTIONS.

Extremists tend to be very fuzzy about what constitutes proof, and they
also tend to get caught up in logical fallacies, such as post hoc ergo
propter hoc (assuming that a prior event explains a subsequent
occurrence simply because of their before and after relationship). They
tend to project wished-for conclusions and to exaggerate the significance
of information that confirms their beliefs while derogating or ignoring
information that contradicts them. They tend to be motivated by feelings
more than facts, by what they want to exist rather than what actually does
exist. Extremists do a lot of wishful and fearful thinking.

5. ADVOCACY OF DOUBLE STANDARDS.

Extremists generally tend to judge themselves or their interest group
in terms of their intentions, which they tend to view very generously, and
others by their acts, which they tend to view very critically. They would
like you to accept their assertions on faith, but they demand proof for
yours. They tend to engage in special pleading on behalf of themselves or
their interests, usually because of some alleged special status, past circumstances,
or present disadvantage.

6. TENDENCY TO VIEW THEIR OPPONENTS AND CRITICS
AS ESSENTIALLY EVIL.

To the extremist, opponents hold opposing positions because they are
bad people, immoral, dishonest, unscrupulous, mean-spirited, hateful, cruel,
or whatever, not merely because they simply disagree, see the matter differently,
have competing interests, or are perhaps even mistaken.

7. MANICHAEAN WORLDVIEW.

Extremists have a tendency to see the world in terms of absolutes of
good and evil, for them or against them, with no middle ground or intermediate
positions. All issues are ultimately moral issues of right and wrong, with
the "right" position coinciding with their interests. Their slogan
is often "those who are not with me are against me."

8. ADVOCACY OF SOME DEGREE OF CENSORSHIP OR REPRESSION
OF THEIR OPPONENTS AND/OR
CRITICS.

This may include a very active campaign to keep opponents from media
access and a public hearing, as in the case of blacklisting, banning or
"quarantining" dissident spokespersons. They may actually lobby
for legislation against speaking, writing, teaching, or instructing "subversive"
or forbidden information or opinions. They may even attempt to keep offending
books out of stores or off of library shelves, discourage advertising with
threats of reprisals, and keep spokespersons for "offensive" views
off the airwaves or certain columnists out of newspapers. In each case the
goal is some kind of information control. Extremists would prefer that you
listen only to them. They feel threatened when someone talks back or challenges
their views.

9. TEND TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES INTERMS OF
WHO THEIR ENEMIES
ARE: WHOM THEY
HATE AND WHO HATES
THEM.

Accordingly, extremists may become emotionally bound to their opponents,
who are often competing extremists themselves. Because they tend to view
their enemies as evil and powerful, they tend, perhaps subconsciously, to
emulate them, adopting the same tactics to a certain degree. For example,
anti-Communist and anti-Nazi groups often behave surprisingly like their
opponents. Anti-Klan rallies often take on much of the character of the
stereotype of Klan rallies themselves, including the orgy of emotion, bullying,
screaming epithets, and even acts of violence. To behave the opposite of
someone is to actually surrender your will to them, and "opposites"
are often more like mirror images that, although they have "left"
and "right" reversed, look and behave amazingly alike.

10. TENDENCY TOWARD ARGUMENT BY INTIMIDATION.

Extremists tend to frame their arguments in such a way as to intimidate
others into accepting their premises and conclusions. To disagree with them
is to "ally oneself with the devil," or to give aid and comfort
to the enemy. They use a lot of moralizing and pontificating, and tend to
be very judgmental. This shrill, harsh rhetorical style allows them to keep
their opponents and critics on the defensive, cuts off troublesome lines
of argument, and allows them to define the perimeters of debate.

11. USE OF SLOGANS, BUZZWORDS, AND THOUGHT-STOPPING CLICHES.

For many extremists shortcuts in thinking and in reasoning matters out
seem to be necessary in order to avoid or evade awareness of troublesome
facts and compelling counter-arguments. Extremists generally behave in ways
that reinforce their prejudices and alter their own consciousness in a manner
that bolsters their false confidence and sense of self-righteousness.

12. ASSUMPTION OF MORAL OR
OTHER SUPERIORITY OVER
OTHERS.

Most obvious would be claims of general racial or ethnic superiority--a
master race, for example. Less obvious are claims of ennoblement because
of alleged victimhood, a special relationship with God, membership in a
special "elite" or "class," and a kind of aloof "highminded"
snobbishness that accrues because of the weightiness of their preoccupations,
their altruism, and their willingness to sacrifice themselves (and others)
to their cause. After all, who can bear to deal with common people when
one is trying to save the world! Extremists can show great indignation when
one is "insensitive" enough to challenge these claims.

13. DOOMSDAY THINKING.

Extremists often predict dire or catastrophic consequences from a situation
or from failure to follow a specific course, and they tend to exhibit a
kind of "crisis-mindedness." It can be a Communist takeover,
a Nazi revival, nuclear war, earthquakes, floods, or the wrath of God. Whatever
it is, it's just around the corner unless we follow their program and listen
to the special insight and wisdom, to which only the truly enlightened have
access. For extremists, any setback or defeat is the "beginning of
the end!"

14. BELIEF THAT IT'S
OKAYTO DO
BAD THINGS IN THE
SERVICE OFA "GOOD"
CAUSE.

Extremists may deliberately lie, distort, misquote, slander, defame,
or libel their opponents and/or critics, engage in censorship or repression
, or undertake violence in "special cases." This is done with
little or no remorse as long as it's in the service of defeating the Communists
or Fascists or whomever. Defeating an "enemy" becomes an all-encompassing
goal to which other values are subordinate. With extremists, the end justifies
the means.

Extremists have an unspoken reverence for propaganda, which they may
call "education" or "consciousness-raising." Symbolism
plays an exaggerated role in their thinking, and they tend to think imprecisely
and metamorphically. Harold D. Lasswell, in his book, *Psychopathology and
Politics*, says, "The essential mark of the agitator is the high value
he places on the emotional response of the public." Effective extremists
tend to be effective propagandists. Propaganda differs from education in
that the former teaches one what to think, and the latter teaches one how
to think.

16. HYPERSENSITIVITY AND VIGILANCE.

Extremists perceive hostile innuendo in even casual comments; imagine
rejection and antagonism concealed in honest disagreement and dissent; see
"latent" subversion, anti-semitism, perversion, racism, disloyalty,
and so on in innocent gestures and ambiguous behaviors. Although few extremists
are clinically paranoid, many of them adopt a paranoid style with its attendant
hostility and distrust.

17. USE OF SUPERNATURAL
RATIONALE FOR BELIEFS AND ACTIONS.

Some extremists, particularly those involved in "cults" or
extreme religious movements, such as fundamentalist Christians, militant
Zionist extremists, and members of mystical and metaphysical organizations,
claim some kind of supernatural rationale for their beliefs and actions,
and that their movement or cause is ordained by God. In this case, stark
extremism may become reframed in a "religious" context, which
can have a legitimizing effect for some people. It's surprising how many
people are reluctant to challenge religiously motivated extremism because
it represents "religious belief" or because of the sacred-cow
status of some religions in our culture.

18. PROBLEMS TOLERATING
AMBIGUITY AND UNCERTAINTY.

Indeed, the ideologies and belief systems to which extremists
tend to attach themselves often represent grasping for certainty in an uncertain
world, or an attempt to achieve absolute security in an environment that
is naturally unpredictable or perhaps populated by people with interests
opposed to their own. Extremists exhibit a kind of risk-aversiveness that
compels them to engage in controlling and manipulative behavior, both on
a personal level and in a political context, to protect themselves from
the unforeseen and unknown. The more laws or "rules" there are
that regulate the behavior of others--particular their "enemies"--the
more secure extremists feel.

19. INCLINATION TOWARD "GROUPTHINK."

Extremists, their organizations , and their subcultures are
prone to a kind of inward-looking group cohesiveness that leads to what
Irving Janis discussed in his excellent book Victims of Groupthink.
"Groupthink" involves a tendency to conform to group norms and
to preserve solidarity and concurrence at the expense of distorting members'
observations of facts, conflicting evidence, and disquieting observations
that would call into question the shared assumptions and beliefs of the
group.

Right-wingers (or left-wingers), for example, talk only with
one another, read material that reflects their own views, and can be almost
phobic about the "propaganda" of the "other side." The
result is a deterioration of reality-testing, rationality, and moral judgment.
With groupthink, shared illusions of righteousness, superior morality, persecution,
and so on remain intact, and those who challenge them are viewed with skepticism
and hostility.

20. TENDENCY TO PERSONALIZE
HOSTILITY.

Extremists often wish for the personal bad fortune of their
"enemies," and celebrate when it occurs. When a critic or an adversary
dies or has a serious illness, a bad accident, or personal legal problems,
extremists often rejoice and chortle about how they "deserved"
it. I recall seeing right-wing extremists celebrate the assassination of
Martin Luther King and leftists agonizing because George Wallace survived
an assassination attempt. In each instance their hatred was not only directed
against ideas, but also against individual human beings.

21. EXTREMISTS OFTEN FEEL THAT THE SYSTEM
IS NO GOOD
UNLESS THEY WIN.

For example, if they lose an election, then it was "rigged."
If public opinion turns against them, it was because of "brainwashing."
If their followers become disillusioned, it's because of "sabotage."
The test of the rightness or wrongness of the system is how it impacts upon
them...